Miscellaneous desk
< January 10	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 12 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 11

How do you invest in a country overall?

So I'm browsing wikipedia this morning, and I'm reading the Tunisia article and thinking "My, that really looks good. Politics moving to democracy, civil society growing up, economy growing steadily. I want some of that action." Now while I'm simplifying here, and rest assured I don't usually invest money based on 1 hours web browsing, say I did want to basically make an investment which would track Tunisia's success generally, how would I do that? 81.157.95.47 (talk) 11:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some ideas:

1) If they have a stock market, then you would want to invest in those stocks. In particular, if there is an index fund for that stock market, that's the way to average out the individual stock performances.

2) Some mutual funds invest in one nation only. For example, you might find a China or Japan fund.

3) Finally, there's direct investment. Find some business there that seems like a winner, and buy stock in it. (Note that if we assume there's no stock market in that nation, then they would likely trade on a foreign stock exchange. Also, you can always buy stock directly from the company.) StuRat (talk) 14:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stu, I don't think that you can buy stock direct from every company. Are you certain of this? Dismas|^(talk) 23:17, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not absolutely certain, no, but in countries without a stock exchange, this seems far more likely. StuRat (talk) 04:40, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is an area where you really need to have some deep knowledge in order to avoid losing your shirt. Developing nations usually lack the oversight mechanisms that protect investors in countries like the US -- and even in the US those mechanisms too frequently fail. Even when economies are growing rapidly, there is a tendency for profits to vanish into the mist before foreign stockholders ever catch sight of them. I'm not saying it can't be done, but you do have to know what you are doing. Looie496 (talk) 17:20, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Akiba?

This essay by polio survivor Leonard Kriegel in The American Scholar 38, no. 3 (Summer 1969) refers to "Akiba" in paragraph 20:

I can remember my neighbors, on my return home, praying for me, inquiring about my health, quoting for my benefit the words of Christ, St. Francis, Akiba and F. D. R.

Who is Akiba? From our Akiba, Akiba (given name), and Akiba (surname) DABs, Akiba ben Judah Loeb seems the only entry even remotely possible, but he doesn't fit the list.

It may be an OCR error, as there are several others (such at "tile" for "the"). This copy of the essay, which still says "Akiba", lacks some of the same errors of the former copy, but they may have been hand corrected. -- ToE 12:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Probably Akiva ben Joseph (43 - 137 CE), who has quite a few memorable quotes attributed to him. Tevildo (talk) 15:45, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Confirming. Most often referred to (and web-searchable) as Rabbi Akiva, without the patronymic. The substitution of the letter b for v is possibly a transliteration artifact based on spelling rather than pronunciation. -- Deborahjay (talk) 16:43, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, both of you. I still suspect that it is more likely an OCR error, but I will put checking that on my low priority list of things to do next time I'm at a good library. -- ToE 21:12, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@ToE: OCR? Probably not. "Akiba" (also "Aqiba") was the standard old-fashioned scholarly spelling (see [1] for example). הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 20:12, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I now see that the spelling "Akiba" even appears 32 times in our article. Thanks, Hasirpad.

I could see Kriegel being annoyed at hearing Akiba's favorite maxim, "All that God does is for the good." -- ToE 12:45, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History: Standard White Cornish Game Chickens

I have not been able to locate any history info regarding where, how or when the current Standard White Cornish Game chicken was developed. Any assistance or advice from you will be appreciated. Thanks you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfpeix (talk • contribs) 14:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the information in our "Cornish game hen" article cover it? In the "history" section, it says:

"Most sources credit Alphonsine "Therese" and Jacques Makowsky of Connecticut for developing the small bird in the mid-1950s. A Saturday Evening Post article from July 1955 credited Mrs. Makowsky with coming up with the idea to breed the Cornish game chicken, a small bird with short legs and a plump, round breast that she had discovered in a book. The Makowskys began cross-breeding the Cornish game cocks with various chickens and game birds, including a White Plymouth Rock Hen and a Malayan fighting cock, to develop the Rock Cornish game hen, a succulent bird suitable for a single serving."

That seems to cover the "where" (Connecticut), "how" (by cross-breeding several other strains) and "when" (mid-1950's) - and even answers the "who". If there is more that you need to know, then I recommend following the three references and one "further reading" link at the bottom of that article. SteveBaker (talk) 15:37, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is some confusing overlapping terminology here. There appear to be three kinds of "Cornish" chickens. The "Cornish Bantam" is not part of this question. The "Cornish" or "Indian Game" which comes in subvarieties, White, Dark, White Laced, Red, Buff. This breed was developed in the late 1800s in Cornwall. The "Cornish Cross" (Cornish X) or "Rock Cornish" or "Cornish Game" is a hybrid cross of Rock and Cornish, not an actually variety (that is each Cornish game hen has one Rock parent and one Cornish parent).[2] Which seems to contradict what is in our article. Rmhermen (talk) 18:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's more confusing terminology. Why do we have an article on a "hen" when it's really about the hens AND roosters of that breed? The OP presumably went looking for "Cornish Game chicken", covering both genders, couldn't find them, hence this question. (Then, of course, there's the question of why some people say chicken when they really mean adult birds. I call 'em all chooks.) HiLo48 (talk) 20:57, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Farmers are really only interested in the hens - cocks are really only needed for making more hens and they are born trouble-makers in the farmyard. Hence that terminology dominates the common usage. Wikipedia rules require that articles are named according to common usage (see WP:COMMONNAME) - so calling the article "Cornish game chicken" would be a violation of article naming guidelines. A similar problem occurs with "Cow" versus "Bull" and "Calf" - and we resolve it in the same way. As for "chicken" versus "chick" - would you have us rename "Dog" to "Puppies and dogs"? We consistently name articles about animals according to the adult form - and we generally prefer to use the common name for the animal. SteveBaker (talk) 15:39, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you missed several of my points, or claimed certainty where it doesn't exist. Roosters eat less than hens, especially if the hens are trying to lay eggs, so if you're interested primarily in meat, roosters can be a benefit. And I've always been intrigued about the word "chicken" representing an adult form of a bird. You dog/puppy "analogy" doesn't really work. HiLo48 (talk) 20:16, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the "common name" of the flower widely known as Edelweiss. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Traps for young* players, Bugs (* I use the term advisedly). There's your mistake: thinking that "consistent" means doing things the same way. As SteveBaker once famously said: "Inconsistencies are just that - inconsistancies". :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:37, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The owners of the botany pages decided that the Latin names of plants are the common names. As supported by the songs, "Leontopodium alpinum, every morning you greet me..." and more recently "...So when you really love me bring me Leontopodium alpinum." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:51, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The strict ruling is that the most common name in reliable sources should be used - and I'm guessing that for plants, it was decided that reliable sources are botanists and horticulturalists who tend to use the latin names...so perhaps it's justified. But I believe that it's bad to get too worked up about names of articles - it's very easy to make a redirect from the alternative name. The critical thing is that both names should be mentioned early in the article's lede so that people don't get too confused that they typed "Edelweiss" and ended up at "Leontopodium alpinum"...I don't much care which one is in the title. SteveBaker (talk) 20:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where online could I buy Sentai Metal_Hero_Series subbed on dvd?

Like for instance Jikuu Senshi Spielban or Space Sheriff Shaider? Thank you. Venustar84 (talk) 22:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coloured sailors thumbprints on ID cards

Whilst at the naval museum today,one of the items on display was a English sailor's ID card from 1918 with a docket attached from the New York Labor Board that he was lawfully employed whilst in the city and not liable to repatriation.Apart from picture and signature,it had a space for the left thumbprint which stated 'This is compulsory for Asiatics,African and black seamen.'I'm assuming the thumbprint was for identification in case of death or injury,but why would it be compulsory for non-whites?And why not compulsory for white sailors? Lemon martini (talk) 23:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely sounds racist. My guess, white guys made the rules, so made them to favor other white guys. In this case, it allowed white sailors with criminal records to hide better. Presumably the thumbprints could be checked against known criminals. Let's say a black criminal escaped in the area of the docks, then the police might check the thumbprints of blacks on ships in the area.

If the white guys who made the rule needed a justification, they would probably have said those minorities are all inherently prone to criminality, so additional measures against them are appropriate. StuRat (talk) 04:46, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Was the card signed? Relative literacy (or a racist assumption of relative literacy) may also have been a factor. The thumbprint might be used to substitute a signature for someone who would only sign with an X. MChesterMC (talk) 09:18, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]